PDA

View Full Version : Iraq war costs project to be 15% of entire national debt


jAZ
07-07-2007, 12:37 PM
1.4 trillion / 8.8 trillion

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/07/war-costs-soar-.html

War Costs Soar by a Third; Total Could Top $1.4 Trillion
By Noah Shachtman July 06, 2007 | 9:37:40 AM

It's not just the troops that are surging. War costs are up for American operations in Iraq and Afghanistan* -- way up, more than a third higher than last year. In the first half of this fiscal year, the Defense Department's "average monthly obligations for contracts and pay is running about $12 billion per month, well above the $8.7 billion in FY2006," says a new report, obtained by DANGER ROOM, from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service.

Additional war costs for the next 10 years could total about $472 billion if troop levels fall to 30,000 by 2010, or $919 billion if troop levels fall to 70,000 by about 2013. If these estimates are added to already appropriated amounts, total funding about $980 billion to $1.4 trillion by 2017.

Meanwhile, Inside Defense reports that "top Pentagon budget and program officials have directed the military services to prepare spending proposals to finance Iraq and Afghanistan operations... through fiscal year 2009, which will span the last days of the Bush administration and the early months of the next administration."

* Corrected 4:48 PM; thanks to CD for the heads-up.

Logical
07-07-2007, 02:34 PM
Great, fantastic waste of money. But we waste money on all sorts of shit so what else is new.

StcChief
07-07-2007, 04:59 PM
better yet let's set home and see what it does to economy if we get hit again.

Logical
07-07-2007, 05:15 PM
better yet let's set home and see what it does to economy if we get hit again.

We can be fighting the WOT without trying to police Iraq.

Calcountry
07-07-2007, 07:03 PM
Well, why the heck don't the Democrats in congress fix that?

Ugly Duck
07-07-2007, 08:10 PM
Great, fantastic waste of money. But we waste money on all sorts of shit so what else is new.

This is interesting:

"The number of U.S.-paid private contractors in Iraq now exceeds that of American combat troops, newly released figures show, raising fresh questions about the privatization of the war effort and the government's capacity to carry out military and rebuilding campaigns."

"These numbers are big," said Peter Singer, a Brookings Institution scholar who has written on military contracting. "They illustrate better than anything that we went in without enough troops. This is not the coalition of the willing. It's the coalition of the billing."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-private4jul04,0,5808980.story?coll=la-home-center

No wonder the tab is blowing up... we have to pay huge profits on top of the war costs. Neocons are supporting more contractors than they are troops, and there ain't much accounting for the cash that contractors are shoving into their pockets. Repubs are "fiscal conservatives" no mo.

jAZ
07-07-2007, 08:18 PM
Well, why the heck don't the Democrats in congress fix that?
It takes 67 votes in the Senate and 290 in the House to over ride the Republican in the WH's veto.

So the Republicans in the House, Senate and WH are blocking the Dems from doing anything about it.

banyon
07-07-2007, 09:47 PM
This is interesting:

"The number of U.S.-paid private contractors in Iraq now exceeds that of American combat troops, newly released figures show, raising fresh questions about the privatization of the war effort and the government's capacity to carry out military and rebuilding campaigns."

"These numbers are big," said Peter Singer, a Brookings Institution scholar who has written on military contracting. "They illustrate better than anything that we went in without enough troops. This is not the coalition of the willing. It's the coalition of the billing."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-private4jul04,0,5808980.story?coll=la-home-center

No wonder the tab is blowing up... we have to pay huge profits on top of the war costs. Neocons are supporting more contractors than they are troops, and there ain't much accounting for the cash that contractors are shoving into their pockets. Repubs are "fiscal conservatives" no mo.

No Kidding, why don't we just hire the Hessians and be done with it?

Ugly Duck
07-07-2007, 10:24 PM
No Kidding, why don't we just hire the Hessians and be done with it?

Maybe it would be cheaper to hire a buncha Congo rebels & the like that are slinking around the bush in Africa. Get about a hundred thousand & turn 'em loose in Baghdad. They might work real cheap...

FD
07-08-2007, 10:12 AM
Wait, wars cost loads of money? This is big news.

jAZ
07-08-2007, 10:34 AM
Wait, wars cost loads of money? This is big news.
If you listened to the Bush WH war advocates pre-war... yes... this is big news.

http://www.americanprogress.org/kf/priraqclaimfact1029.htm

CLAIM: Iraq will be an affordable endeavor � that � will not require sustained aid and will be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion .
-- Budget Director Mitch Daniels [Forbes 4/11/03, W. Post 3/28/03, NY Times 1/2/03, respectively]

CLAIM: Costs of any such intervention would be very small.
-- Top White House Economist Glen Hubbard [CNBC, 10/4/02]

CLAIM: Paul Wolfowitz dismissed articles in several newspapers this week asserting that Pentagon budget specialists put the cost of war and reconstruction at $60 billion to $95 billion in this fiscal year.
--[NY Times, 2/28/03 ]

CLAIM: In terms of the American taxpayers contribution, [$1.7 billion] is it for the US. The rest of the rebuilding of Iraq will be done by other countries and Iraqi oil revenues. The American part of this will be 1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this.
-- USAID Director Andrew Natsios, 4/23/03

CLAIM: The oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.
-- Paul Wolfowitz, [Congressional Testimony, 3/27/03]

CLAIM: Iraq, unlike Afghanistan, is a rather wealthy country. Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction.
-- White House Spokesman Ari Fleischer, 2/18/03

Simplex3
07-08-2007, 12:26 PM
Wonder what portion of the deficit goes to cover the food, housing, and medical needs of the jack offs in this country who didn't bother to plan for their own needs? What portion is going to pork projects fought for and won by your own Congressional members?

There's so much waste it's sickening. Frankly, if we were actually over there taking over the oil fields this war would be turning a profit. We suck at it.

Pitt Gorilla
07-08-2007, 02:06 PM
Frankly, if we were actually over there taking over the oil fields this war would be turning a profit. We suck at it.Why don't we? Honestly, if the war was about cheaper/free oil, I bet a lot more people would feel better about it.

ClevelandBronco
07-08-2007, 02:18 PM
Send lawyers, guns and money...

Ugly Duck
07-08-2007, 02:41 PM
Why don't we? Honestly, if the war was about cheaper/free oil, I bet a lot more people would feel better about it.

At this point, we oughta partition Iraq into four provinces: Kurd-stan, Shia-stan, Sunni-stan, and Oil-stan. We move all our guyz to Oil-stan & pump until we get our money back. Then we leave. The majority of Iraqis want us to die anyway, so what would taking the oil do - make them want us to die deader?